AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |
Back to Blog
Anvil weight system12/28/2023 I went reading on the JSME archive today, like Don Schad said in the other thread, the paper on anvil to tup weight ratios seems to settle on a number of about 10:1. If you look at a hammer like the closed die Banning 'ring frame' it helps with the understaning of 'elastic circuit' I think most of the size of the inertia block is to prevent the block tiping and sinking over time under heavy use (caused by the very small % of energy that is leaving the 'system'' of tup and anvil as vibration). Again, not based on science, but gut feeling - once the concrete is large enough to minimise vibration (which is lost energy) it is large enough. If you study the 'elastic circuit' of a hammer mounted on concrete you will realise once the system flex has been minimised the energy can only go into the forging. My gut feeling is not very much effect on efficency after a certain point. I have not solidified my thoughs on the size of the concrete inertia block under a hammer and any effect it has on forging efficency. Personally I would see that as a marketing thing untill I saw the science behind it. I have seent the 'ceco' anvil efficency chart that Jock has put the anvilfire copyright logo on. That point is tough, cooling, thin section material. Personally I have found hammers with small anvils to be very effective up to a certain point. You could specify 15:1 or 20:1 as an option.ĭrop hammers (closed die) were nearly all made with 20:1 anvils. Massey made 90% of their open die hammers with a 10:1 anvil.
0 Comments
Read More
Leave a Reply. |